|

There are many reasons why couples may choose to get a divorce at a later stage in their lives. Indeed, divorces cantake place for many of the same reasons attributed to younger breakups – including financial pressures, infidelity and more. Between 1990 and 2010, the divorce rate for people between the ages of 50 and older in the U.S. doubled according to a study by sociologists at Bowling Green State University, indicating that the further we move into the future, the more natural it is to consider divorce as a solution to an unhappy marriage. One thing I notice regularly about divorces that take place between older partners, is that there are a different set of concerns in play than the worries that might have taken precedence during divorce at an early stage. For instance, when seniors get a divorce, the main focus is on both the immediate and future financial security of those individuals. Child custody, parenting time, and child support might still be at issue.  Often, however, with more mature couples, there are no issues regarding child support and child custody – as the children have grown into adults who can care for themselves. Instead, the primary issues are on things like the distribution of pensions and 401ks, the choice of whether a house is sold or kept, and whether maintenance, alimony or spousal support should be awarded.

In mature people and senior divorce cases, the financial issues can be particularly crucial because if both of the people involved are already retired, then there is less likelihood that either spouse will be in a position to create new assets or income. Even if one individual is still working, they may choose to retire and find that their earned income ceases. One of the first considerations in these divorce circumstances will often be maintenance. While many young couples agree to maintenance agreement that provides support for an ex for a shorter period of time, those exiting in long-term marriages might be seeking maintenance for a longer duration.  The New York 2016 maintenance law does contain not only guidelines for maintenance amounts based on income, but it also has guidelines for the duration of post divorce maintenance. Continue reading ›

|

Both parents are expected to support their children in New York. Generally, however, a non-custodial parent pays support to a child through the custodial parent. Many feel that child support is predicated on the idea that children should have the same lifestyle after a divorce as they had beforehand, which, as people transition from one household to two, is not always exactly possible.  Child support, however, is not only applicable to divorcing parents.

When a non-custodial parent doesn’t pay court-ordered child support, there are numerous ways for the custodial parent or Support Collection Unit to enforce payments. If a parent is delinquent and owes back child support, that parent is considered to be in arrears. Unpaid arrears, that are reduced to judgment, accumulate interest even if you are paying child support currently.

For support orders entered after August 8, 1987, the Support Collection Unit or the other parent can require a delinquent parent to pay off arrears for 20 years from the date of default, regardless of whether that amount was reduced to a judgment.  When arrears are reduced to a judgment, that judgment then is good for twenty years. The statute of limitations to enforce arrears for orders entered before that date is six years.  Generally, child support obligations terminate automatically when a minor turns 21 years old, although there are instances when they continue, such as by agreement to pay beyond the age of 21 and payments of arrears can continue until the arrears are satisfied, but subject to the above statute of limitations.

Continue reading ›

|

When you and your spouse agree that it might be time to consider a divorce, you’ll discover that there are a number of different routes available for you to choose from. Divorce doesn’tautomatically have to be about stressful litigation – it can be something that you come to terms about collaboratively, with the use of mediation. Mediation is a flexible process that can be used to help you sort out existing problems regarding the financial results of your divorce, or what needs to be done about child custody and parenting time. Unfortunately, just because one spouse decides that mediation may be the right call for their divorce needs – doesn’t mean that the other spouse will agree.

Sometimes, simply broaching the topic of mediation with caution and patience is a good way to get started in encouraging your spouse to agree to an alternative form of dispute resolution. After all, divorce is easily one of the most uncomfortable experiences a person can go through. Although you might be getting a divorce, that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be mindful and respectful of the other person’s feelings.

Approaching the Topic on Neutral Ground

A good way to encourage a reluctant spouse to reconsider the option of mediation, is to approach the subject from a position that is important to both of you. For example:

  1. Consider the Children

Make sure that your spouse understands that through mediation, you can reduce some of the discomfort typically associated with aggressive court-based battles and litigation. This can be beneficial to the future relationships that both of you maintain with your children. What’s more, throughout the mediation process, you will both be in control of any decisions made about the support and parenting of your children – meaning that you can work together to fashion an agreement that works for both of you. Continue reading ›

|

In an overwhelming number of cases, parents agree to a child custody arrangement without involving the court. However, some child custody cases are brought to court because parents are unable to agree. In those cases, the Supreme Court or Family Court is supposed to allocate to each parent decision-making, care-taking, and access to the child, making these determinations based on what would be in the best interests of the child.

Custody determinations related to best interests depend largely on the court’s assessment of the parties’ credibility, character, and temperament. The higher courts are not supposed to interfere with these determinations, made by a trial court, unless they lack a sound and substantial basis in the record.

Under New York Family Court Act § 251, the court can order anyone within its jurisdiction and the parent or other person legally responsible for the care of a child within its jurisdiction to be examined by a physician, psychologist, or psychiatrist designated for that purpose if the examination serves the purposes of the act. This person can provide a forensic evaluation that allows the court to determine which custody and visitation arrangement would be in the best interests of the child.

Continue reading ›

|

Child custody and time-sharing arrangements in New York are determined based on the children’s best interests. In some cases, a forensic evaluation is ordered. This may include general and specialized psychological testing and clinical interviews of the parents and children. In some cases, collateral information is also gathered, and home visits are made.

Forensic evaluations are not always necessary, but they may be appropriate in cases in which there are sharp factual disputes that affect the final determination of where a child will live and which kind of custody, parenting time or visitation arrangement is in the child’s best interest. Generally, the court will look at the circumstances of the parents and child and see whether there are particular issues that would warrant an in-depth inquiry. The court is supposed to order forensic evaluations sua sponte (on its own motion), even if neither party expressly requests it. The evaluator is typically appointed based on recommendations.

Issues that might necessitate a forensic evaluation may include relocation issues, a parent or a child’s emotional problems, allegations of alcohol abuse, or facts that indicate a custodial parent might undermine the relationship between a child and the other non-custodial parent. In Matter of Shanika M. v. Stephanie G., for example, Stephanie was the aunt of a child that her domestic partner, Shanika, and she were taking care of but never formally adopted. The parties separated when the child was two years old, and the child continued to live with Stephanie.

Continue reading ›

|

The New York Family Court processes petitions for child support, establishes new child support orders, and determines whether a modification should be made to an existing child support order.  It is possible to also utilize the Supreme Court to establish, enforce or modify child support, particularly in a divorce or postjudgment divorce case.  Most child support payments in New York are made by a noncustodial parent paid direct to the other parent or through the Support Collection Unit (SCU).

Once the court has issued a child support order requiring the support collection unit to collect payments, the SCU collects and distributes the payments. If the noncustodial parent falls behind in payments, the SCU can enforce the order. Once a parent applies for services, the support order has to be paid through the SCU, and the custodial parent can no longer accept direct payments from a noncustodial parent or informally agree to change the support order. If the noncustodial parent wants to pay the custodial parent directly, the noncustodial parent should either make sure this is reflected in the initial order or file a modification petition subsequently in order to ask that a direct payment be credited to his or her account.

Once child support is ordered, the parent who is required to pay is given a payment instruction sheet, indicating how much to pay and how to make the payments. For parents who work, a notice may be sent to their employer with instructions about taking the child support payments out of the salary and sending them to the Support Collection Unit or SCU. However, these payments can also be taken directly from other income streams, such as unemployment or even a pension. Payments may not be deducted from a worker’s paycheck for a few weeks from the time of the child support order.

Continue reading ›

|

In New York, an antenuptial agreement that goes into effect once the parties are married may be valid even if the minister that solemnized the marriage received his authority from an unconventional religion. In Oswald v. Oswald, the court considered the effect of a antenuptial or prenuptial agreement after a marriage ceremony performed by a Universal Life Church minister. The parties had executed the agreement three days before the ceremony, but its terms only took effect after the “solemnization of the marriage.”

The plaintiff sued five years after the marriage asking the court to declare the marriage void from the beginning and the antenuptial agreement unenforceable because the person performing the ceremony did not have legal authority to solemnize the marriage. Alternatively, he wanted a divorce. The defendant responded by denying the marriage was invalid and counterclaiming for a divorce. The parties both moved for summary judgment.

The lower court granted the plaintiff’s motion. The defendant appealed, arguing that the plaintiff should not be allowed to argue the marriage was void because he represented otherwise on their joint tax returns. The court agreed that a litigant could be prevented from taking a position contrary to the position taken for purposes of filing taxes. However, it explained that a marriage that is void couldn’t be retroactively validated because the party held themselves out as being married.

Continue reading ›

|

Child Custody disputes and Divorces are complicated at the best of times.  Often, legally breaking down a relationship becomes moredifficult when children are involved. When a mother and father choose to separate or divorce, they not only have to think about the steps that should be taken to improve their chances of pursuing their own best interests, but they also should think carefully about the best interests of their children. That is the standard that a New York court would use.

While, in an ideal scenario, fathers and mothers seeking a divorce would carefully come to a decision about custody agreements, child support, and parenting time or visitation together, using a mediation method or collaborative law – without the strain of battling the issue out in court – family law is not always this simple. In some cases, a New York Supreme Court or Family Court judge will be forced to step into the scenario and figure out which parent should be awarded primary physical custody. In these cases, there are many factors for a judge to consider when putting the best interests of a child first, and one is the concept of who can be defined as the “primary caretaker” for the children.  Please note that the primary caretaker status is not determinative of the best interests of the children, rather it is one of the many considerations that can be taken into account. During this blog, I will discuss which details can be provided to show who can be regarded as the primary caretaker of a child, and what it means to be a primary caretaker.  Continue reading ›

|

When you apply for a modification of an earlier order in a New York child custody dispute, you’ll have to present evidence showing a change of circumstances to justify that the modification is necessary to protect a child’s best interests. If you stipulated to the earlier order there is case law that stands for the proposition that you can present evidence of any changes from the time of stipulation.

Although you should show that the substantial change occurred since the issuing of the order, the court may consider all relevant factors related to the best interests of the child when determining child custody, sometimes, even, including the behavior of the parents before and at the time of stipulation. In determining whether a change in circumstances warrants the modification of a custody arrangement, the court will look at whether the change implicates the fitness of the custodial parent or affects the nature and quality of the noncustodial parent’s relationship with the child. There may be a time lag between a stipulation and the court’s issuance of an order, but this should not be a lost period for the purposes of presenting evidence to prove that the modification is appropriate.

For example, in the Matter of MMH v. William DH, the court considered a New York mother’s request for a modification of an earlier order. She wanted an order for sole custody and an order that would allow her to move to another state. The father opposed the application for these orders.

Continue reading ›

|

Resolving issues in a New York divorce through mediation is usually less expensive than asking the court to resolve them through trial. However, certain conditions are necessary to mediate matters like property division, spousal support, child custody, and child support. The primary condition that needs to be present is the ability to communicate.  Sometimes a mediator is the very thing that can work to facilitate the communication necessary to resolve the issues needed to be agreed upon to legally separate or divorce.

Unfortunately, many relationships have broken down because of difficulties communicating. When a couple engages in deceit, threats, coercive behavior, or physical violence, the relationship may be too   damaged to have a rational discussion of options, especially with regard to such matters as maintenance and child custody.  Just because any of those aspects exist, does not mean it is impossible to mediate.  As, it all starts with the willigness to try to mediate.  Last week’s blog was about situations where mediation is worth trying, even in high conflict relationships.  If one spouse is phsyically afraid of the other, because of prior domestic violence for example, it is possible that he or she may agree to things in the process of mediation in order to get away from the other spouse.

Couples that have a high degree of conflict or even abuse in their relationships may not be able to communicate with each other in a productive way, but instead they may communicate out of strong destructive emotions like extreme anger (anger is not uncommon with mediating couples or fear. In those cases, mediation is not a good option because peaceful negotiations are not possible.  I should mention, that although past performance is not predictive of future results, I have seen a high success rate in resolving issues for the couples that have agreed to mediate.  But today’s blog is about a case, not one of mine, in which at least one of the parties to a mediation had second thought afterwards. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
99 Jericho Turnpike #300-G
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (516) 333-6555

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Law Office of Darren M. Shapiro
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design